E 438 
.S25 
Copy 1 




lASi^ 



Glass. 
Book_xb_L5_ 



SPEECH 

OF 

HON. ¥ILLA.RD SAULSBURY, 

OF DELAWARE, 

OK 

THE STATE OF THE UNION. 



DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, APRIL 2, 1863 



The Senate having resumed the consideration of the resolution submitted by Mr. Davis 
on the let of March, Mr. SAULSBURY said- 
Mr. Peesident : It is not mj intention to speak to the merits of the 
resohitions submitted by the Senator from Mississippi. They are the 
occasion rather than the text of my discourse. I propose to speak 
briefly to-day concerning the state of the Union ; to inquire whether 
its harmony is endangered ; whether its integrity is threatened ; 
whether its existence is imperiled ; and if so, by what means and 
through whose agency such results have been produced ; upon whom 
responsibility therefor rests, and whether there be any remedies for 
8uch evils, and v.'liat those remedies are. Taught from earliest boy- 
hood to respect the teachings of the Father of his Country as both 
patriotic and wise ; to regard his admonitions with reverence, and to 
believe that his precepts should be by all observed ; believing that the 
liberties which our fathers achieved can only be permanently secured 
by the preservation of the Union which they formed ; that liberty and 
union are one and inseparable, I have accustomed myself to regard 
our Federal Union as the palladium of our liberty, and for that, above 
every other reason, earnestly to oppose every political party organiza- 
tion whose principles were calculated, if practically applied in the 
administration of the General Government, to alienate the affections 
of the people of one portion of our common country from the people 
of another. 

That differences of opinion should exist, both in reference to the 
domestic and foreign policy of a Government, in a country ^here 
c =uch policy is dependent upon the popular will, is neither a matter of 
' wonder nor cause of regret ; but that a people possessing the inesti- 
mable blessings of a free Government^ themselves the reaf sovereigns, 
and those charged with the administration of public affairs their 
agents, subject to their control, and removable at their pleasure, 

Printed by Lemuel Towers, at $1 per hundred copies. 



\-c^lp 



should allow those differences, in themselves capable of legal and sat- 
isfactory adjustment in accordance with the fundamental law of their 
political society, to endanger that possession, to wreck the fortunes of 
the present, to blight the hopes of the future, shows them unmindful 
of liberties which are theirs by inheritance, not by purchase, and 
should subject their memories to the withering execration of the 
teeming millions of the future time, who may learn from the truthful 
narrative of some future Gibbon, sitting amid the crumbling ruins of 
their once proud and mighty capital, the blessings which they madly 
spurned and the destiny which they ingloriously surrendered. That 
such may be our sad, our mournful fate as a people, the indications 
of the present, no less than the examples of the past, admonish, unless 
we timely pause, calmly think, and wisely act. It is not in the strug- 
gles of national infancy, nor in the early battlings with adverse fortune 
in individual life, that the existence of the one is generally destroyed, 
or the hopes of the other forever blasted. Prosperity is more danger- 
ous to either than adversity ; and each would be equally fortunate, 
could the spirit by which prosperity was attained be remembered and 
practiced, when dangers have been passed and difficulties subdued. 

Scarce eighty years have passed away since our fathers, few in 
numbers, but brave in spirit, fought the battles of the Eevolution. 
They came from the North, they came from the South, they came 
from the East, they came from their then West, and, by their united 
efforts, achieved a common liberty for a common people, liberty for 
themselves, and liberty for us, their posterity. To achieve that liberty, 
many of them fell a sacrilice on freedom's altar. 

"They fell, devoted but undying, 
The very gales their names seem sighing; 
The waters murmur of their name, 
The woods are peopled with their fame; 
The meanest rill, the mightiest river, 
Rolls mingling with their fame forever." 

To secure the liberty thus achieved to themselves and to their pos- 
terity, the people of the several States agreed to meet together through 
their representatives, and consult for the general good — the good jnot 
of each separately, but of the whole unitedly. They did meet;_ they 
did consult in the spirit of fraternal feeling. They were not without 
their differences of opinion ; they were not without their apparent 
conflicts of interest; but these differences were adjusted; these cor 
iiicts were not "irrepressible ;'' they were harmonized, and they ente 
ed into a compact ; they formed a Union which they intended to be 
perpetual, and which will endure forever if we act for its preservation 
in the same spirit of moderation and justice in which they acted in ita 
formation. Our fathers were wise men — practical men. The}^ had 
not studied in the schools in which were taught the sublimated theo- 
ries of "irrepressible conflicts." They assumed not to be wiser than 
their Maker, nor better than their Saviour. They essayed not f > 
question the " ways of Providence to man," nor impiously assumeo; 
the moral government of the world. They had not even learned tlie; 
simple nomenclature of "capital States" and ^'labo.r States" now in- 
corporated into the political vocabulary of ambitious aspirants for ofn - 
cial positions which they have never merited, and of political honor! 5 



wliicli, if conferred, would be worn only to be disgraced. Thej found 
society formed; they did not attempt to reform or disrupt it. They 
were members of distinct and independent political communities, dif- 
fering, to some extent, in their domestic institutions and economic 
pursuits, but discovered in these no serious impediment to a common 
union for a common good. 

Under the mysterious disj^ensations of an allwise Providence, Afri- 
can slavery had existed in the thirteen original colonies almost from 
the time of their first settlement. It had become incorporated into 
the very frame-work of society. Had it been desirable, it would have 
been impossible for the superior or white race to rid themselves of the 
inferior or servile race. The discovery of the equality of races eo 
manifestly distinct that both the forming finger and providence of the 
Almighty are traceable in that distinction, was reserved for the polit- 
ical seers of a subsequent generation. The framers of the Constitution 
were the representatives of independent political sovereignties. They 
formed a Federal Union for the common benefit of all. They clothed 
the Federal Government with such powers, and such powers only, as 
they considered essential or necessary for the equal and common in- 
terest and protection of each and all. They reserved to the States 
respectively the regulation and government of their own domestic in- 
stitutions and internal polity in their own way. They did not question 
the right of property in slaves ; but as, from the nature of that prop- 
erty, its owners might be subjected to its loss by reason of its escape, 
either voluntarily or through the solicitations and persuasions of otli- 
ers, and as the Constitution was formed, among Other things, to secure 
domestic tranquillity to the people of the States, and between the 
States themselves, the fathers provided in the Constitution, in the 
common bond of their Union, that — 

"No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into 
another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be di8charo;ed from such 
service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to wliom such service or 
labor may be due." 

Here is a distinct and positive recognition in the Federal Constitu- 
tion of the right of property in slaves. Here is a constitutional recoo-- 
nition that one man may have a right of property in another, and a 
constitutional guarantee that such right shall be respected and en- 
forced, not only against the opposition of individuals, but against the 
interference of States. "Historically," remarks Justice Story, in the 
case of Prigg vs. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania — 

'"It is well known that the object of this clause was to secure to the citizens of tie 
slaveholding States the complete right and title of ownership in their slaves as property 
in every State of the Union, into which they might escape from the State where tliey were 
held in servitude. The full recognition of this I'ight and title was indispensable to the 
securit}^ of this species of property in all the slaveholding States ; and, indeed, was so 
vital to the preservation of their domestic interests and institutions, that it cannot be 
doubted that it constituted a fundamental article, without the adoption of which the 
Union could not have been formed. Its true design was to guard against the doctrines 
a^c^J/jruicf/j/fis prevalent in the non-slaveholding States, by preventing them from inter- 
meddling with, or obstructing, or abolishing the rights of the owners of slaves."' 

Again, in his Commentaries on the Constitution, he remarks : 

''The want of such a provision under the Confederation was felt as a grievous iatcai- 
venience by the slaveholdiij.^ States; since in many States no aid whatever woald be 
allowed to the owners, and cpmetimes, indeed, they met with open resistance." 



And here, sir, it may be remarked tliat this provision waa incor- 
porated in the Constitution by the unanimous vote of that body ; and 
that it appears, from the opinion and commentaries of Mr. Justice 
Story cited, that — 

" Its true design was to guard against the doctrines and principles prevalent in the non- 
slaveholdiug States, by preventing them from intermeddling with, or obstructing, or abol- 
ishing the rights of the owners of slaves." 

What were those principles and doctrines? The same which have 
been recently revived, and which are now advocated by the leaders 
and masses of the Eepublican party : that slavery is a moral, social, 
and political evil ; that it is contrary to the law of God ; and that all 
men — 'African slaves as well as American freemen — are born free and 
equal ; and that political institutions which deny them equal political 
rights and advantages are unjust; and that the denial to them of these 
rights is in contravention of the Scripture injunction, Do unto others 
as you would that they should do unto you. Let those who now pro- 
fess such a reverence for the memory of the fathers, know that those 
very fathers, by incorporating this provision in the Federal Constitu- 
tion, meant to guard their countrymen against the doctrines and prin- 
ciples which they now advocate ; and to prevent, in the future, the 
repetition of the%vrongs resulting from these doctrines and principles 
which had been suifered in the past. 

Upon this provision and its historical illustrations, I remark that 
the Constitution, in which it is contained, having been ratified by the 
people of the several States, and thereby the general advantages 
which it was designed to secure having been obtained by them, the 
faith of such States, and of every State which has since been admitted 
into the Union under it, was and is pledged to see to it that this clause, 
as well as every other therein, is fairly observed and honestly en- 
forced. It is the agreement, it is the covenant, it is the bond. Each 
citizen is bound to see that the faith of his State is preserved ; and 
any attempt, either by the individual citizen or by a State to evade 
or violate, weaken or annul, the obligation thus assumed, is personal 
dishonor and State perfidy. But, sir, our fathers were not perfidious. 
They assumed obligations' as patriots, as patriots they discharged them. 
In 1793, they passed tlie first fugitive slave act to carry out in good 
faith this provision of the Fedei-al Constitution. It was approved by 
George Washington, president of the convention which framed the 
Consritution, and then President of the United States.^ Under his 
administration, and those of the elder Adams, of Jefterson, and ot 
Madison, the domestic and foreign policy of the Government was 
shaped and advanced, if not perfected. The public mind of the 
country was at times deeply agitated in reference to that policy, and 
deeply stirred by the discussions of questions connected therewith. 
But from the violation of phghted faith there was no cause for gen- 
eral or sectional complaint. The fathers of the Kepublic had heeded 
ih% patriotic counsels of Washington against the formation of politi- 
cal parties founded upon geographical distinctions and sectional issues- 
No State had been denied admission into the Union on accout of the 
character of its domestic institutions. 
But many of the fathers had fallen asleep„ Most of those remam- 



mg had gone into tlie retirement of private life, and there awaited, 
m the tranqnihty of age, the expected snmmons to their kindred dead. 
But, sir, that repose was destined to a most terrible shock. A people 
who had successfully achieved their independence of a powerful for- 
eign and oppressive foe, who had established a free and independent 
Republic, far, far away from the seats of former civilized political em- 
pires ; a Eepublic the anomaly of the present, and fit to be the model 
of the future ; who had witnessed the principles of the Government 
they had established practically and felicitously applied in the de- 
velopment of their national resources and in the expansion of their 
growing power ; who in a second struggle with their former oppressor 
had vmdicated their national honor and successfully maintained their 
national rights, now, that peace with her olive branch had again re- 
turned to bless the husbandman in his toil, the merchant in his' traffic, 
the artisan in his trade, and all in their honorable pursuits, were sud- 
denly startled by the fearful apprehension that the Government they 
cherished was about ingloriously to end, not from the assaults of a 
foreign foe, but from the folly and madness of those upon whom its 
blessings were lost. 

At the time of the adoption of the Constitution nearly all the States 
were slaveholding states. In 1819 and 1820, many of them Ivdvino- 
found that slave labor was to them unprofitable, unsuited to their soif^ 
their climate, and industrial pursuits, and having to a great extent 
parted with their slaves for a valuable consideration, by sending them 
among their more southern brethren, where the condition of the slave 
would be improved, and where his labor would be more remunerative, 
had become non-slaveholding States, l^o one of these States, how- 
ever, had freed their slaves solely from motives of humanity. Econo- 
mic considerations mainly influenced their action. While interest was 
demandant, philanthropy was dormant. When personal interest 
ceased, humanit}^— falsely socalled— became active. The Constitu- 
tion of the United States had provided that "new States may be ad- 
mitted into this Union." There was no qualification annexed, and no 
condition imposed, in respect to the domestic institutions or internal 
polity of such States. No such qualification or condition could, there- 
lore, constitutionally be imposed by Congress upon the admission of 
a State. All the States of the Union are, under the Constitution, 
equal. Those originally ratifying the Constitution did so as equals, 
being the sole judges of what their domestic institutions should be. 
Unless those to be admitted by Congress upon their aj^plicatiou were 
equally their own judges in this respect, then they would not be equals 
with the other States. 

Under these circumstances, and at the time I have mentioned, Mis- 
souri^ applied for admission into the Union. Her government was re- 
publican in form. She labored under no constitutional disqualification 
tor admission. Does any one believe that if Missouri had been an 
independent community, as was IS^ew York, as was Delaware, at the 
,time of the formation of the Constitution, that, under the same cir- 
cumstances, her admission into the Union would have been oi;)posed? 
Does any one believe that had the framers of that instrument been 
<jlothed with the power of determining whether Missouri should be 



6 

admitted, they would have refused her admission ? Not unless party 
preiudice has so blinded his judgment as to render it an unsafe coun- 
selor even in the ordinary duties of life. Yet, sir,' the admission pt 
Missouri was opposed, and the Senator from New York has said his- 
toiy tells us that the Union reeled under the vehemence of that great 

If such be the fact, it only proves that there were men then, for the 
first time in the Federal Congress, as there are men now throughout 
this country, who, for the purpose of gaining a sectional and party 
triumph or'securing for themselves and their followers the high places 
of power and the emoluments of office, in the prosecution of unconsti- 
tutional measures, would cause the Union of their country to reel. 
Sir in that strucrgle patriotism did not take counsel Irom prudence, 
as 8U<^gested bylhe Senator from New York; but patriotism unwise- 
ly listened to the demands of ambition. If ever there was a blot and 
a blur upon the statute-book of this country, it was the miscalled com- 
promise of 1820. It was a statute, since judicially decided to be un- 
constitutional, which was exorted from patriotism by the spirit ot rev- 
olution and the suggestions of selfishness. Sir, ever since I read the 
able and conclusive argument of the eloquent and gifted rmckney 
upon the Missouri restriction, I have regarded the motives that de- 
manded it, and the restriction itself, and the provision ot the act ot 
1820 which attempted to prescribe the conditions ot the admission ot 
States into this Union, with a loathing and a detestation which is only 
lialf removed by the tardy but patriotic repeal of such conditions m 

Mr President, our opponents are given to much talking about the 
aggressions of the slave power. They would have the country be- 
l^ve— they even have the eftrontery to assert on this fioor— tliat the 
peace of that country, in reference to the institution of domestic slave- 
ry would have been uniform and unbroken, had it not been tor the 
ikreasonable and unconstitutional demands of that^power. lo his^ 
torv I appeal. Let her decide the controversy. Who was it that 
created the excitement in 1819 and 1820'^ Was it the friends and 
supporters of the equal rights of the States, those who then favored 
the principle that each State and the people of each Territory when 
they came to form a constitution, preparatory to their admission as a 
State into the Union, should form and regulate their own domestic 
institutions in their own way ; or was it those who thought as tlie l.e- 
publican party now profess to think, that Congress should form and 
recnilate tLse institutions for the people of the Territories ? Had the 
slave propagandists of the South forced slavery upon the people of 
Missouri « Had "border ruflians" from other States expelled the 
Sends of freedom from her fertile plains ? Had not her own people, 
freely of their own choice, established among themselves the rehition 
of m'a ter and slave ? Did she not, with that relation thus established, 
ap^y for admission as a State into the Union ? Had not Congi-ess the 
power to admit her? Would there have then been any excitement 
in the country in reference fo slavery if objection had no been made 
to her admission? Who n^ade that objection?^ Was it the Demo^ 
oratic party of that day; wa^ it the Representatives from the slave- 



holding States, or was it tlie Eepresentatires from the non-slavehold- 
ing States ; those who, for the accomi^lishment of partisan purposes, 
had become the advocates of the free-soil ^^rinciple which has since 
become intensified into modern Republicanism ? By the record the 
assertions of the Republican party are refuted. By the record, the 
enemies, not the friends, of domestic slavery are proved to be respon- 
sible for the first excitement since the formation of the Constitution 
upon this subject. 

But, sir, we are told by the Senator from Xew York, that the 
" question of 1820 was identically the question of 1860, so far as prin- 
ciple, and even the field of its application, was concerned. Every 
element. of the controversy now present entered it then^ the rightful- 
ness or the wrongfulness of slavery ; its effects, present, and future ; 
the constitutional authority of Congress ; the claims of the States, and 
of their citizens ; the nature of the Federal Union, whether it is a 
compact between the States, or an independent Government ; the 
springs of its power, and the ligatures upon their exercise." Sir, I 
accept the issue, and will hereafter consider it more particularly in 
reference to its principle. But the Senator, like most of the members 
of his party, Avho are also members of this body, professes great rev- 
erence for the memory and labors of the fathers. I wish to cite the 
opinions of one of those fathers in reference to this issue of 1820, 
which is said to be the issue of 18«0 ; and of one for whose opinions 
upon the subject of slavery some of our opponents have expressed un- 
bounded admiration. In the retirement of private life, and in the 
venerableness of declining years, lived Thomas Jefferson at Monti- 
cello, in his own native and loved Yirginia, when the controversy of 
1819 and 1820 startled the country from its comparative repose. His 
hand had drafted the Declaration of Independence. He had been a 
chief in establishing the principles and policy of the infant Republic. 
He was now awaiting his summons to the spirit land. He was " origi- 
nally opposed," remarks his biographer, " to the slavery restriction 
clause of the bill, and equally so to the establishment of the ' Missouri 
compromise bill,' as it was called." Instead of regarding the efforts 
of those who opposed the admission into the Union with favor, and 
approving their motives, he readily apprehended, and promptly ex- 
posed, their true designs. In a letter to C. C. Cabell, dated January 
23, 1820, he thus declares : 

"The Missouri question is for power." 

Again, in a letter to H. oSTelson, dated March 12, he says : 

" I thank you, dear sir, for the information, in your favor of the 4th instant, of the set- 
tlement for the present of the Missouri question. 1 am so completely withdrawn from all 
attention to public matters, that nothing less could arouse me than the definition of a 
geographical line which, on an abstract principle, is to become the line of separation of 
these States, and to render desperate the hope that man can ever enjoy the two blessings 
of peace and self-government. The question sleeps for the present, but is not dead." 

Again, in his letter to Mark Langdon Hill, April 5, of the same 
year, he says : 

" I congratulate you on the sleep of the Missouri question. I wish I could say on its 
death; but of this 1 despair. The idea of a geographical line once suggested, will brood 
in the minds of all those who prefer the gratification of their ungovernable passions to the 
peace and union of their country." 



8 

In a letter to "William Short, of the 13th of April, he observes : 

" Although I had laid down as a law to my?elf never to write, talk, or even think of 
politics ; to know nothing of public affairs, and therefore had ceased to read newspapers, 
yet the Missouri question aroused and filled me with alarm. The old schism of Federal 
and Republican threatened nothing, becmise it existed in evert/ State, and united them to- 
gether by the fraternism of partj^ But the coincidence of a marked princij)le, moral and 
political, with a geograpliical line once conceived, I fear would nevermore be obliterated 
from the mind ; that it would be recurring on every occasion, and renewing irritations 
until it would kindle such mutual and mortal hatred as to render separation preferable 
to eternal discord. I have been among the most sanguine in believing that our Ur'on 
would be of long duration. I now doubt it much, and see the event at no great distance, 
and the direct consequence of this question, not by the line which has been so confident- 
ly counted on — the laws of nature control this — but by the Potomac, Ohio, Missouri, or 
more probably the Mississippi, upwards to our northern boundary. iNI}' only comfort and 
confidence is, tha^ I shall not live to see this ; and I envy not the present generation the 
glory of throwing away the fruits of their fathers' sacrifices of life and fortune, and of 
rendering desperate the experiment which was to decide ultimately whether man is capa- 
ble of self-government. This treason against human hope will signalize their epoch in 
future history as the counterpart of the medal of their predecessors." 

And in his celebrated letter to John Holmes, which has heretofore 
been cited in this Chamber, by opposition Senators, he says : 

"I thank you, dear sir, for the copy you have been so kind as to send me of the letter 
to your constituents on the Missouri question. It is a perfect justification to them. I had 
for a long time ceased to read newspapers, or pay any attention to public affairs, confi- 
dent they were in good hands, and content to be a passenger in our bark to the shore 
from which I am not distant. But this momentous question, like a fire-bell in the night, 
awakened and filled me with terror. I considered it at once as the knell of the Union. 
It is hushed, indeed, for the moment; but this is a reprieve only, not a final sentence, 
A geographical line coinciding with a marked principle, moral and political, once conceived 
and held up to the angry passions of man, will never be obliterated ; and every new 
irritation will mark it deeper and deeper." 

And again : 

"Of one thing I am certain: that as the passage of slaves from one State to another 
would not make a slave of a single human being who would not be so without it, so their 
diffusion over a greater surface would make them individually happier, and proportionally 
facilitate the accompUshment of their emancipation by dividing the burden on a greater 
number of coadjutors. An abstinence, too, from this act of power would remove the 
jealousy excited by the undertaking of Congress to regulate the condition of the different 
descriptions of men composing a State. This certainly is the exclusive right of every 
State, which nothing in the Constitution has taken from them and given to the General 
Government." ^* * * * * * * * * 

"I regret that I am now to die in the belief that the useless sacrifice of themselves by 
the generation of 1776, to acquire self-government and happiness to their country, is to 
be thrown away by the unwise and unworthy passions of their sons ; and that ray only 
consolation is to be, that I live not to weep over it. If they would but dispassionately 
weigh the blessings they will throw away agaiust an abstract principle, more likely to 
be effected by union than by scission, they would pause before they would perpetrate 
this act of suicide on themselves, and of treason against the hopes of the world." 

But I will not multiply quotations. These sufficiently show the 
motives of those who caused the "Union to reel" in 1820. It was 
the thirst for power ; not the promptings of philanthropy or the love 
of freedom. " The question sleeps," says Jefterson, " it is not dead." 
" This is only a reprieve, not a final sentence." Subsequent events 
proved his opinions to be prophecies. Miscalled a compromise, it 
was never observed nor intended to be observed by those who ex- 
torted it. The possession of present power never gratifies ; it must 
continue, expand, and be perpetual. Hence, aggression is its hand- 
maid; injustice and oppression its agencies. ^ .. 

This much-talked of compromise prdved to be no compromise at all. 



9 

Why not ; and who are responsible therefor ? Even the Senator from 
'Ne^y York, in his arraignment of the Democratic party at Rochester, 
nnintentionallj, it is true, but in fact, absolves it, and admits its ene- 
mies to be responsible for whatever of excitement and of agitation 
has existed upon this subject. Hear him. Hesajs: 

"From 1838 to 1844, the subject of abolishing slavery in the District of Columbia and 
in the national dock-j'ards and arsenals, was brought before Congress by repeated appeals. 
The Democratic party thereupon promptly denied the right of petition." 

Who was it, then, that renewed the slavery agitation ; who were 
unwilling to let things remain as the fathers left them ; who, from 
183S to 184-±, were making their appeals to the national Congress to 
legislate further, notwithstanding the Missouri compromise, upon the 
subject of slavery ? "Was it the Democratic party ? Assuredly not, 
if the Senator from Xew York is a credible witness. They only re- 
fused to legislate upon this exciting subject when called upon to do 
80, against the faith of compromises, the guarantees of the Constitu- 
tion, and the peace of the country, by anti-slavery agitators, who had 
no possible practical interest in the legislation they demanded. Again, 
says the Senator : 

"From 1840 to 1S43, good and wise men counseled that Texas should remain outride 
of the Union until she should consent to relinquish her self-instituted slavery;" 

and charges that the Democratic party precipitated her admission into 
the Union. This is only additional evidence that, upon eveiy occa- 
sion when the subject of domestic slavery has awakened excitement 
either in or out of Congress, such excitement has been produced, not 
by the Democratic party, but its enemies. They have invoked the 
action of Congress for its suppression in the original Territories 5 they 
have op]>osed the acquisition of other territory, unless the people 
thereof would abandon their own domestic institutions, and allcv'w the 
anti-slavery sentiment of the country to say what those institutions 
should be. 

Again, when we acquired our Mexican possessions, what occasioned 
the excitement then existent in the country ? The attempt not to leg- 
islate slavery into, but to exclude slavery therefrom ; to pre'vent its 
going there ; to determine in advance what the domestic institutions 
of a distant people should be ; to determine these matters for them, 
and not allow them to determine them for themselves. When, for 
the purpose of preventing excitement and sectional feeling upon this 
subject, propositions have been made in Congress by Democratic 
members to extend the Missouri compromise line to the Pacific ocean, 
the propositions have invariably been opposed by these pretended 
friends of that compromise, but real disturbers of the public peace. 

I will not dwell upon the history of the compromise measures of 
1850. How intense was the excitement, how bitter tlie controversy, 
is already but too familiarly known. If by their adoption, the storm 
was apparently for a time allayed, it was soon to be revived, with far 
greater intensity; to grow and swell until the "Union was indeed to 
reel under the vehemence of the great debate." The passage by 
Congress of the fugitive slave law, as one of those measures to carry 
more fully into efi"ect the great constitutional compact entered into by 



10 

onr fathers, was seized upon by designing men as a pretext for popu- 
lar appeal to a blind and fanatical spirit, pervading too raucb the 
great northern portion of our country. Men of extreme views and 
unbounded personal ambition, unwilling to bide their time, perceived 
in this spirit an engine of political power, and a means, if it could be 
made available, of displacing the more conservative men in the free 
States; and when Congress, finally, in establishing the Territories of 
Kansas and ISTebraska, repealed a former unconstitutional act, the oc- 
casion was too opportune for the purposes of sectional agitation to be 
left unimproved by personal ambition. State after State attempted, 
by its legislation, to nullify the fugitive slave law ; and a great sec- 
tional party arose, relying solely for success upon the superior strength 
of section over section, waging a political warfare, which, for viru- 
lence of feeling and bitterness of speech, is scarcely equaled in the 
history of partisan struggles in this or any other civilized country, 
either in ancient or modern times. Having selected an adventurer 
as their standard-bearer, they enter the contest of 1856, the assumed 
representatives of the philanthropy, the morality, civilization, and 
Christianity of the age ; and without scarcely a friend or follower in 
fifteen States of tlie Union, they emerge from the conflict self-sur- 
prised at their almost triumphant success. Upon the distant plains of 
Kansas they placed in the hands of their maddened followers the 
deadly rifle for the destruction of its peaceful inhabitants, and echoed 
far, far away towards the setting sun the impious sentiment, fallen 
fron2 the lips of a degraded priesthood that in life's civilization, the 
rifle it^ more efficient and more pleasing in the sight of the Almighty 
than His own most Holy Word. Struggling for jdace and power, 
they h'lve told their deluded followers that, in God's law, and in the 
Declare. tion of American Independence, it is written that all men are 
created free and equal, and that neither the arbitrary regulations of 
political communities nor the constitutions of civilized States can in- 
terpose ri-u-htful barriers to the inalienable rights of man. 

There '- one listens to their teachings, believes in their principles, 
and resi . , es to carry them out to their logical conclusions. John 
Brown, in the privacy suited to the accomplishment of a desperate 
purpose, collects his meager but determined forces, and goes forth 
upon h'c mission to free the slave, even by the murder of his master. 
The stillness of a Sabbath's night is chosen for the accomplishment 
of the hellish deed, and ere the morning sun relumes the heavens, 
quiet and peaceful citizens sleep the last cold sleep of death. And 
whore did all this occur? Almost in sight of the spot where repose 
the '.shes of him whose hand drafted the declaration of a nation's in- 
dies. endence ; of him who made that declaration good by leading the 
intant armies of his country forth in glorious and successful war ; 
and of him who, of all men, did most to frame that bund of Union — 
the Constitution of his country — which made the people of this land 
one in interest, one in right, and one in destiny. As the dread news 
is borne along, the mother clasps her unconscious infant more closely 
to her bosom, and the manly father girds himself for the defence of 
his country and his home. The invader, the murderer, and the traitor 
is seized, and awaits in a felon's cell the execution of the law's decree. 



11 

sympathizing messages are borne to liim from sympathizing spirits 
fjir away, reminding him of his glorious fate, and still more glorious 
future historic name. Even Senators, while disapproving of the act, 
avow the sympathy of their people for the qualities of the felon hero ; 
and a powerful press, the general representative of Eepublican princi- 
ples, declares that John Brown will hereafter be regarded as the most 
glorious martyr in the history of martyrology. The whole land has 
been convulsed. The Senate of the United'States is divided, as if by 
a hostile line, and those on either side regard each other as common 
foes. Can these things be, and this Union stand? If the American 
people are wise, they will deeply ponder this question. 

In tracing the history and causes of political events, I have indica- 
ted my views in reference to the questions whether this Union is im- 
periled, and what political party is responsible therefor? But in 
criminality there may be degrees. The man who has done more than 
any other to bring tliis Union to the verge of dissolution, who has 
inogt persistently uttered teachings and advised a policy which inevit- 
ably tend to that result, is now an aspirant for its highest honors. 
He recently delivered a speech in this body, in which he professed 
great respect for the principles and action of the fathers of the Re- 
public. In reference to the ditficulties they encountered in the for- 
mation of tlie Constitution, he remarked : 

"The fatliers disagreed, debated long, and compromised at last. Each State they de- 
termined shall have two Senators iu Congress; three-fifths of the slaves shall be else- 
where represented, and be taxed as persons. What should be done if the slave should 
escape into a labor State? Should that State confess him to be a chattel, and restore him 
as such ? or might it regard him as a person, and harbor and protect him as a man ? They 
compromised again, and decided that no person held to labor or service in one State, by 
the laws thereof, escaping into another, shali, by any law or regulation of that State, be 
discharged fiom sucli labor or service ; but shall be delivered up, on claim, to the person 
to whom such labor or service shall be due." 

Well, sir, the Senator has furnished some memorable illustrations 
of his very high regard for this compromise and decision of the fath- 
ers. History tells us that the Senator was once Governor of the State 
of New York, and that whilst he held that position, three persons res- 
ident in that State were charged on oath in the State of Virginia with 
having feloniously stolen, taken, and carried away a negro slave be- 
longing to a citizen of Virginia from his possession ; and upon this 
charge, a demand was made by the Governor of Virginia upon the 
Governor of ISTew York for their surrender as fugitives from justice. 
The Governor at first attem])ts to find fault with the form of the afii- 
davit ; but finally meets the question boldly, and refuses compliance 
with a constitutional requirement. In his letter to the Governor of 
Virginia, he says : 

"But it is by no means my wish to protract unnecessarily the correspondence on thi.^ 
subject, or to avoid a decision upon the important principle it involves. I beg leave, 
therefore, to state most respectfully that even were I to admit that the afhdayit was suffi- 
cient in form and substance to charge the defendants with the crime of stealing a negro 
slave from his master in the State of Virginia, as defined by the laws of that State, yet, 
in my opinion, the offence is not within the meaning of the Constitution of tlie United 
States." 

The reason for his opinion was, in substance, that, inasmuch as the 
State of New York was a free State, slave stealing was no ofiFence 



12 

against her, and, there beinoj no law in that State recognizing slavery, 
her citizens could go into Virginia and steal as many slaves as they 
•pleased, and with perfect impunity, if they were not overtaken by the 
authorities of Yirginia before they returned to the sheltering bosom 
of New York and the protecting arm of her Constitution-loving Gov- 
ernor. The provision of the Constitution is as follows : 

"A person charged in any State with treason, felony, or other crime, who shall flee 
from justice and be found in another State, shall, on demand of the executive authority of 
the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having jurisdic- 
tion of the crime." 

The absurdity of the proposition contended for by the Governor of 
New York is this : that according to it there can be no crime against 
the sovereign ty of Yirginia within the meaning of the Constitution 
which New York declines by her legislation to make a crime against 
her own soveignty; and therefore, if New York declines to make trea- 
son, felony, or other crime, punishable Mdthin her jurisdiction, there 
is no constitutional obligation upon her to surrender fugitives from 
justice from other States. But I will not argue the proposition. This 
was only slave stealing; and that, according to the political and 
moral ethics of the Senator, may be a virtue, not a crime. 

John Brown avowed, I believe, that his object in his invasion of 
Yirginia was to carry off slaves — peaceably if not resisted, forcibly 
only if opposed. Had he succeeded in his purpose without bloodshed, 
and escaped to his home in New York with all the slaves of Yirginia, 
what a fortunate Governor' for him would he have found in the Sena- 
tor from New York! But the Senator has on another occasion ex- 
pressed his devotion to the compromises of the fathers. He made a 
speech^ in the State of Ohio, which has already been cited against 
him this session. I quote from it only to preserve the symmetry of his 
record for public admiration. Hear him : 

"The party of freedom seeks complete and universal emancipation." * * * 
"Slavery is the sin of not some of the States only, but of them all ; of not one nation 
only, but of all nations. It perverted and corrupted the moral sense of mankind deeply 
and universal!}', and this corruption became a universal habit. Habits of thought beconie 
fixed_ principles. No American State has yet delivered itself entirely from these habits. 
We, in New York, are guilty of slavery still by withjioldiiig the right of suffrage from 
the race we have emancipated. You, in Ohio, are guilty in the same way by a system o^ 
black laws still more aristocratic and odious. It is written in the Constitution of the 
United States that live slaves shall count equal to three freemen as a basis of representa,- 
tion; and it is written also, in violation of Divine law, that we shall surrender the fugi- 
tive slave who takes refuge at our fireside from his relentless pursuer. Yow blush not atl 
these things, because they have become as familiar as household words ; and your pre- 
tended Free-Soil allies claim peculiar merit for maintaining these miscalled guarantees of 
slavery which they find in the national compact. Does not all this prove that the Whig 
party liave kept up with the spirit of the age? that it is as true and faithful to human 
freedom as the inert conscience of the American people will permit it tobe? What, then, 
(you say,) can nothing be done for freedom because the public conscience remains inertf 
Yes, much can be done ; everything can be done. Slavery can be limited to its present 
bounds. ^ It can be ameliorated. It can be and must be abolished, and you and I can and 
must do it. The task is simple and easy, as its consummation will be beneficent and its 
rewards glorious. It requires only to follow this simple rule of action : to do everywhere 
and on every occasion what we can, and not to neglect or refuse to do what we can at 
any time, because at that precise time and on that particular occasion we cannot do more. 
"Circumstances determine possibilities." ******* 
"But we must begin deeper and lower than the composition and combination of factions 
or parties, wherein the strength and security of slavery lie. You answer that it lies in 
the Constitution of the United States and the constitutions and laws of slaveholding States. 



13 

Kot at all. It is in the erroneous sentiment of tlie American people._ Constitutions and 
laws can no more rise above the virtue of the people than the limpid stream can climb 
above its native spring. Inculcate 1>lie love of freedom and the equal rights of man under 
tho paternal roof; see to it that they are taught in the schools aud in the churches ; re- 
form your own code ; extend a cordial welcome to the fugitive who lays his weary limbs 
at your door, and defend him as you would your paternal gods ; correct your own error, 
tliat slavery has any constitutional guarantee which may not be released, and ought not 
to be relinquished." ******** 

" Whenever the public mind shall will the abolition of slavery, the way will be open 
for it. 

"I know that you will tell me this is all too slow. "\\ ell, then, go faster if you can, 
and I will go with you." 

Sir, John Brown did go faster. He went to Virginia ; and the 
Senator went to view the Pyramids. Surely those who, in life, had 
been so intimately associated in purpose, object, aim, hope, in death 
should not have been divided. 

The Senator, when addressing the American Senate on the eve of 
a presidential election, when he is aspiring to the highest office 
within the gift of the people, when the public sense and feeling of the 
country — North, South, East, and West — have been shocked by the 
practical results of his former teachings, and when rival aspirants of 
supposed greater moderation of views in his own party are threaten- 
ing him with defeat, can talk of the compromises of the fathers in 
reference to domestic slavery ; but in addressing the masses of Ohio 
those very comproniises are the subject of his ridicule. He exhorts 
them to '"^ correct their error that slavery has any constitutional guar- 
antee which may not be released, aud which ought not to be relin- 
quished." He tells them that "it is written in the Constitution of the 
-United States that five slaves shall count equal to three freemen as a 
basis of representation ; and it is written also, in violation of Divine 
law, that we shall surrender the fugitive slave who takes refuge at our 
fireside from his relentless pursuers.'' He tells iis that the fathers 
agreed, by compromise, to these things, and would have us believe 
that he consents to them ; but he tells the men of Ohio to " extend a 
cordial welcome to the fugitive who lays his weary limbs at your 
door, and defend him as you -vrould your paternal gods." 

It is not slavery in the Territories that engages his great thoughts. 
It is slavery as it'is recognized in the Constitution, and as it exists in 
the States. This, he tells them, " can and must be abolished, and 
that he and they can and must do it." Eut, sir, had the recent speech 
of the Senator lu this body been one of definite positions in reference 
to this subject, instead of being composed of glittering generalities, 
what reliance could be placed upon his fidelity to them, or of fidelity 
on the part of those whom he represents, when he himself has told 
us of the value of pledges, programmes, aud platforms. Hear him 
in his celebrated irrepressible speech at Rochester. He says : 

"One class say that they cannot trust the republican party ; that it has not avowed its 
hostility to slavery boldly enough, or its affection for freedom earnestly enough. I ask, 
in replj', is there any other party which can be more safely trusted? Every one knows 
that it is the Republican party or none that shall displace the Democratic party. But I 
answer further, that the character and fidelity of any party are determined necessarily 
not by its pledges, programmes, and platforms', but by the public exigencies, and the tem- 
per of the people when they call it into activity." 

Away, then, with pledges and platforms by such a leader, and such 
a party ! But, sir, the Senator not only respects the compromises of 



14 



denm ,on of equdity than that whieh i c'ont^iined in /h 'n' ^''" •^^-*'' *° ^°^ ^ better 
or of justice, than the form which our rehVion adon , Tf ^'''"'T'^ «f Independence, 
are born free and equal, institutions wl 'ch d nv t?P m ' T 'r -^^T ''' ^'^'"■'^' ^^^ °^en 
tages are unjust; and if I would do Tt otS t ft '^n \P°'^^'?^ "^'^^'^^ ^"-^^ ^dvan- 
should not deny them any ri^ht on account of thth, '^1"^ '^''''' ^'^'"^ *" ^^° ""^e me, I 
they or their ancestors wire born On?v t m an d^ '^' ''T'' ^'^ '^ '^'' '^"^^ >" ^^^^^ ^ 
xipheld and those who have opposed Z-mrsui^Tto^l^^^^^^^ ^^'T'" ''^°^« ^^^^ ^'-^^'^ 
feel encouraged to wait that decision- !ince in a n,nl .•^"''^ ^/^^ adverted. But I 

injustice should come, the exile doeTnotJepChZn '''■'°' '^ T'^'"' '*^l"-'^^ches for 
departure, and the disfranchised and the slJve ^ t ' ^'^'T'- ''^^^ '^'°* ^^'^f* in my 

in-partid a portion „ His X nUtJiZL"' ^"^'"^'{'•'P-S ^"e to whom He h,. 
reward you've,,, vour k-indn""to'^M m™ ,3l r„T- "' '''.'•" '"I'resMd His own image, 
generous and n„-„ee.ort. to r^^^i:tl^:7:S^:::^t:X^^^^^' 

don it. No son of 1,»..^ 1,1, 1 ^ 'l°',.r' <='":ii'nstanecs, to .iban- 

States or ta-eaAe t gh but'hopT^ ,' I! Yf' '" '"^ ^"'™ "^ ">^'^'' 

stt'tv'„ri'"i"'^-^^'*'^ 

thai' :2 r p fr ; t\'s:s'°o;';?i"^'""=';™ '^r Tr^ ^^<^ 

solely fot success n,,™, Sfogmp\nc^\ r,^,.ty :,^, been formed, relying 

^viH^'^'aS? trr±?isf in''::t'Xtr 1 ""' p°T^-' ^'j-^ 

word If pflrrJpc; o Kl .7..1 7 • / ^^^ ^^®^^ ^^^^ proclaimed n 
10 new and tenible, but fitly expressive of its true designs. That 



15 

motto is, " Lavjlessness.''^ Throiigli its cliief, it openly declares that 
" uo pledges, progi'amraes, or platforms can bind it ; but that its action 
will be determined by the public exigencies and the temper of the 
gathering hordes who swell its ranks ;"' that constitutions and laws can 
no more rise above the virtue of the people than the limpid stream 
can climb above its native spring. 

The only tribunal known to your Constitution for the determination 
of such questions has decided that Congress has not the constitutional 
authority to prohibit the existence of African slavery in any of the 
Territitries of the United States. In utter contempt of this decision, 
the miscalled Republican party avow tliat, if successful in their efforts 
to gain the political control of this Government, they will, by congres- 
sional legislation, make that prohibition, and that they will so con- 
struct the Federal judiciary that they shall register, as constitutional, 
their decrees. A lawless legislature, a pliant, subservient, party- 
foaring, and corrupt judiciary ! When these things are consummated 
liberty will have fled our land and ascended to her native heaven. 

Mr. President, against such calamities I know of but one protec- 
tion. It is in the union and harmony of the Democratic party, and 
the co-operation tliercAvith of all truly conservative and Union-loving 
citizens throughout this whole country — jS'orth, South, East, and West. 
The .Senator trom New York was right when he declared that the 
issue was between the Democratic and Republican parties. There 
never has existed in this coraitry at the same time more than two 
great political parties. There can exist but two now. This is no time 
for the formation of a Union or .other party. There has existed in 
this country a great Union party fi'om the beginning, and it exists to- 
day, powerful and great. It stands to-day the bulwark of the Consti- 
tution ; the conservator of the Union of these States. Under its gijiid- 
ing counsels we have increased froin less thaiftive, until we now num- 
ber thirty millions of people. Its policy has swelled the number of 
your States from nearly the original number — thirteen — to thirty-tm-ee. 
It has acquired for you every foot of tei-ritory which has been adiled 
to your national domain. It took the banner of your Union abd 
planted it upon your southern Gulf, and Florida became one of tl 
galaxy of States. It took that banner and planted it upon the va^ 
Territory of Louisiana — an empire in itself; and thus extended your^ 
possessions towards the setting sun. It took that banner and planted 
it upon the virgin soil of Texas ; and she now is one of the sisterhood 
of States. Westward still "the star of empire takes its way;" and, 
faithful to its true mission of expansion and development, it takes that 
same banner of your Union and, marching right onward, plants it in 
glorious triumph upon the shores of the mighty Pacific ; and Utah, 
New Mexico, and California are yours forever. This true Union 
partj^ has made ours an ocean-bound Republic ; great, mighty, pros- 
perous, and free. In peace it has developed our resources and ex- 
panded our power ; and in war, it has successfully maintained our 
rights, and nobly vindicated our national honor. Under its policy, 
and by its counsels, in peace and in war, the feeble Republic of yester- 
day has become one of the greatest and mightiest among the nations 
of the earth. 



16 

Mr. President, this true Union party will also soon meet, tlirongli 
its representatives, in national council. When its roll is called, there 
shall be a response from every State in this vast Confederacy — from 
Maine to Oregon; from Georgia to California; from northern lakes 
to southern Gulf From the banner which shall float over the hall 
of its assemblage no star shall be effaced ; but its banner shall be the 
banner of our common Union. If counsel of one of its feeblest yet 
most devoted of friends could be heard by that convention, it would 
be : Be true to your principles ; be just to all the members of the 
noble party you represent ; accept the issue presented by the Senator 
from ISTew York and those whose chief he is ; apply no new tests of 
party faith ; forget your past differences upon abstract and compara- 
tively unimportant issues ; be tolerant of present differences of opin- 
ion on questions of minor importance; lay upon the altar of your 
country's good your personal, political Isaacs; have no political Pauls 
or Apolloses ; plant yourselves firmly upon the great principle of non-'' 
intervention by Congress with slavery in State, Territory, or the Dis- 
trict of Columbia ; and, remembering that a nation's destiny may 
depend upon your deliberations, go forth to the achievement of a 
noble and a glorious triumph. 



IN EXCHANGE 
^N 5 i8l7 



1^ 



/ 



i 



